International Commercial Arbitration Austrian/Polish Twin Conference

1. International Commercial ArbitrationAustrian/Polish Twin Conference Arbitration Courts and Arbitral Procedure Moderator: Tomasz Wardyński, Wardyński & Partners Pannelists: Paweł Pietkiewicz, CMS Cameron McKenna Nikolaus Pitkowitz, Graf & Pitkowitz Anna Maria Pukszto, Salans Irene Welser, Cerha Hempel Spiegelfeld Hlawati

2. Introduction Historically, mainly in international relations, arbitration was an answer to limitations inherent in national judicial systems; Role of arbitration in the World of tightening judicial cooperation and enhanced rule of law; Arbitrator and his mission – how should it differ from the role of a court judge? Arbitral proceedings – how should they differ from court proceedings?

3. Consensual nature of arbitration and its consequences for the arbitral process Imperium of a judge vs commission of an arbitrator; The essence of the arbitration agreement – mere derogation of state jurisdiction or rather a contract regulating a particular stage of parties’ cooperation; Consequences for the arbitral procedure, its objectives and governing principles;

4. Arbitrator as a dispute manager Passive adjudicator concerned with rendering justice and enforcement of law? or Dispute resolution specialist hired by the parties to resolve their problem? How does the choice influence the arbitrator’s tasks and objectives?

5. Adversary trial vs pro-active arbitration The purpose of the principle of adversary trial; Does it fully apply in arbitration? Should the arbitrator be pro-active? What problems may it raise?

6. Burden of pleading and burden of proof in arbitration Are the principles of establishing facts in arbitration the same as before state courts? Or is arbitration a more cooperative process when it comes to defining the essence of the case and fact-finding? How does the principle of good faith influence the formal burden of pleading and proof?

7. The art of arbitration advocacy Universal model of arbitral proceedings – a hybrid of continental and common law models? Or is it an original creation of long-standing arbitral tradition based on good faith and diligent cooperation in dispute resolution, only inspired by judicial patterns? What practical implications does it have for counsel’s advocacy techniques?